[ywvcbk]

Is most of that an issue if you declare your income and pay any relevant taxes? Outside of some unnecessary annoyances it generally wouldn’t be too complicated to move your money around.

Otherwise, what are you expecting? Direct taxation isn’t really compatible with ‘financial privacy’ and never was.

[vladimirralev]

It depends. Some banks will ask for root origin of funds. Say you earned some money 20 years ago, invested them with various brokers into stocks all over the world, real estate etc. And then cashed a large sum into your account. If any one of those transactions is flagged they will require you to go back 20 years and collect those invoices that you earned and then you have to collect every transaction from the brokers, this may involve foreign jurisdictions where record keeping and querying is not available from 20 years ago.

So you will fail the disclosure and the bank will flag you in the shared blacklist DBs, they close your accounts and you are out of the system. This is happening enmasse to people who invested in and cashed out of real estate abroad(asia/africa/sa) some time ago. I imagine it's the same with foreign stock markets. And you never know what will be required 20 years in the future, thus most financial advisors discourage "moving money around". They even have a whitelist of brokers, stocks and jurisdictions, anything outside that is uninvestable for normal people just because of KYC/AML paperwork requirements.

[beaglessss]

My response is civil rights should drive the tax man's behavior and not the other way around. I will accept a loss in efficiency of taxation.